ipl-logo

Rhetorical Analysis Of Non Violence By Chavez

701 Words3 Pages

Aiden Schroeder
Mrs. DesLauriers
AP Language & Composition
11 January 2023
Resisting Violence: Non-violent Protest Perseveres Throughout Martin Luther King Jr.’s life, he advocated for nonviolent resistance to oppression and racism in America. The solution to the long lasting problem was found in his words and his strength of mind, rather than violence and physical strength. Today, the strategy of nonviolence keeps proving its effect. Using patience and fortitude effectively resists any oppressive force, so long as the masses hold strong. Chavez writes in the name of King Jr. and his success without violent measures. He emphasizes the downfalls of violence and the moral and ethical benefits of nonviolent resistance to oppression. …show more content…

First, Chavez uses his tone to portray a general negative feeling towards violent protest. He does this through statements like, “many injuries and perhaps deaths,” and, “complete demoralization of the workers” (Paragraph 4). Chavez makes these points with a serious, dead-pan tone, to emphasize how much violent protest contrasts with nonviolent ones and the largely unsatisfying result. Violence, in his opinion, never works and therefore never should be used. The excerpt from Chavez also uses many instances of pathos to further dissuade readers from using violence to protest. Towards the end of the excerpt, he writes that “the poor, the workers, the people of the land” get killed in violent revolutions (Paragraph 12). In order to connect emotionally with his audience, Chavez appeals to the real-life conditions of the general public and how violent resistance will end up killing them before it accomplishes any goal. Life over cause shows as a theme in his writing, where protesting peacefully keeps your resistance alive, and violent revolts end up killing it. Third, comparing violent protest to nonviolent, Chavez uses longevity to emphasize why violence does not work. Stating that violence provides a temporary solution, Chavez says that ”people suffer from violence” and non-violence brings people together (Paragraph 11). Comparing these reveals that with violence, even when it succeeds, it only replaces an oppressive, violent force with another one. To accomplish revolution, non-violence holds the most leverage and gathers the most people. Concluding, Chavez successfully downplays violence as a viable option for resistance to oppression by rhetorically convincing his audience

Show More
Related
337 Words | 2 Pages

In line 62 Chavez also provides a reference to Gandhi who was well known for his idea of nonviolence and promoting it. Next, Cesar Chavez uses logos as a rhetorical device

Read More
1806 Words | 8 Pages

Cesar Chavez explained nonviolence as a form of bringing awareness to not only the wages, working conditions and treatment of farm workers, but also the overall treatment of marginalized people in the United States. However, growing up with the perspective of the farmworker’s inspired him to spread the word of resistance against the growers and the government as a whole. Cesar Chavez purpose of La Causa not only inspired people to become a part of something so great, but to inflict change individually by encouraging his brothers and sisters to become mentally and physically strong. Which I believe is the backbone to a non-violence protest. It’s also the mentality a social worker should inhibit because dealing with change, it requires many of

Read More
800 Words | 4 Pages

The Gospel of Cesar Chavez: My Faith in Action, by Mario T. Garcia, uses Cesar Chavez’s own words to express his spiritual and religious personality and how it led him to organize a movement for a change in the farm workers’ lifestyle of America. Through his experiences and observations with religion and spirituality growing up, Cesar created his own myth by conveying nonviolence and self-sacrifice as the basis of his American religious experience. Thus, paving the way towards reform for farm workers. To be able to understand Cesar’s motive behind his movement, violence and nonviolence needs to be distinguished. A violent movement is a protest that is set up to achieve a goal by using violent acts (riots, house raids, etc.).

Read More
412 Words | 2 Pages

The audience that Chavez is addressing is very familiar with Dr. King, and the troubles he went through so it is not hard at all to relate to the audience with ideas of Martin Luther King. “ Nonviolence provides the opportunity to stay on the offensive, and that is a crucial importance to win any contest.” With subject of violent an nonviolent means is so important to almost everyone that it makes almost everyone stand on their toes. With the subject Chavez does a good job of stating “we” instead of “I” because of

Read More
786 Words | 4 Pages

(Chavez 1) His nonviolent approach to difficulties still have a huge aftermath in our world and change it for the better. The author really emphasizes the trueness of King’s character and his example to our struggling lives to make a better world. Additionally, Chavez uses emotion to change the readers view to the capability nonviolence has. For example, “We are convinced that when people are faced with a direct

Read More
651 Words | 3 Pages

He insists on the fact that inhumane vengeance will lead to injury and death, as well as “demoralization”. This argument is greatly supported by the death of Dr. King Jr; his view of nonviolence helped to grow and mature the farm worker’s movement. Civil workers are guilted into supporting their fallen hero in order to fulfill his dying wish. Chavez instructs them to “overcome… [their] frustrations” and support their causes through methods of peaceful protests. Chavez, appealing to their sense of emotion, manages to persuade a disconnected society by desperately wanting to avenge Dr. King’s untimely

Read More
1065 Words | 5 Pages

In addition to reasoning, Chavez uses references to history to further explain his logistics. As said in the passage, “Examine history. Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution? The poor, the workers.” Here, Chavez basically says why bother fighting physically, when the only ones getting killed or injured are the workers or rebels themselves.

Read More
662 Words | 3 Pages

To begin with, Chavez uses logos in his speech through a rhetorical question, “Who gets killed in the case of violent revolution? The poor, the workers.” The people who are arguing for violent revolutions are mostly poor workers whom Chavez refers to. Chavez uses logic to show these people that if they use violent revolts, they are most likely the ones going to be killed which for the most part will deter the people who are aiming for this. Another appeal Chavez uses is ethos to show everyone as people we are expected to do the right thing.

Read More
680 Words | 3 Pages

This passionate tone helps the reader infer Chavez strongly believes in his cause. He repeats of words such as “supports” and “powerful” to show the reader the effect of nonviolence on a person and a community. His appeals to justice make the article relatable to everyone because at a point in one’s life, one has been treated unjustly. Many of the claims presented help provide a connection between the reader and the author. An example of this can be “When victory comes through violence, it it a victory with strings attached”, which shows how violent revolts have many more consequences, which can include death.

Read More
426 Words | 2 Pages

What literary devices did Chavez really use for his argument about nonviolence resistance? Although Chavez uses a variety of literary terms, he uses Logos, the appeal to logic and senses, and aphorism, which is a belief that expresses a truth or principle of life. Chavez uses Logos to bring his point that violent protests not only take away or injure innocent people, but actually may end up hurting your cause in general as it can lower “morale” in those who do support your cause. It can also make those who wish to support your cause not to due to your idea’s violent reactions to your opposition and what they stand for. “If we resort to violence then one of two things will happen: either the violence will be escalated and there will be many

Read More
821 Words | 4 Pages

This is best exemplified by Chavez when he elaborates on violent tendencies since, “If we resort to violence then one of two things will happen: either the violence will be escalated and there will be many injuries and perhaps deaths on both sides, or there will be total demoralization of the workers” (Chavez). From Chavez’s statement about violence approaches to solve problems it impacts the audience from the beginning as it makes them question and reconsider what actually gets accomplished by resorting to violent tactics. This also in return, develops the beginning of Chavez’s main argument as it abhors the use of violence to solve ethical/moral problems and shows that temporary solutions are the only thing to come from such

Read More
483 Words | 2 Pages

The entire article is empowering and inspirational. A call to action by the author for people who have been suffering from injustice. He acknowledges that people turn to violence “when the deep concern they have for the people is frustrated” and how “the burden of generations of poverty and powerlessness lies heavy in the fields of America” (Chavez, 42-44, 48-50). These quotes can lead the reader to empathize with those who are struggling and allow them to recognize that although violence is an easy way out of confronting issues, the more “honorable” and liberating thing to do is participate in non-violent protests. This is exactly what Martin Luther King Jr. did.

Read More
1069 Words | 5 Pages

He uses logos in the form of looking at past history and analyzing the downfalls of violent resistance, to emphasize how violence has many strings attached to it, whereas the more peaceful nonviolent route allows for greater freedom and less risk to the general population. Heavy diction is used to create a separation between violence and nonviolence, shining a bright light onto violence as a negative way to deal with problems, while lifting nonviolence as a means of powerful hand to win any “competition”. It was important for Chavez to remind his audience that nonviolence is the method of choice when fighting for change as it was the 10th anniversary of MLK’s death, an important leader in the civil rights movement who used the power of nonviolence as a method to induce change for the black community. At the time of Chavez’s writing, many farmers were upset over a crash in the agriculture market, with many farmers left with little to no money and no help from the government. Chavez wanted to inform these people of the importance of nonviolence as a way to get their ideas through, as violence would resolve nothing and lead to greater disruptions which would affect the entirety of the American population.

Read More
403 Words | 2 Pages

His repeated use of the word “we” adds to his sense of collaboration. By showing the reader that he is not alone in his fight against oppression and discrimination, Chavez uses the implied “might in numbers” to his advantage. This same convincing tone can be seen in how he lists the benefits of nonviolence and problems of nonviolence and issues of nonviolence. He convinces by stating that “nonviolence is more powerful than violence” and it can “support you if you have a just and moral cause.” By refusing to give any ground to opposing viewpoints in his article, Cesar makes sure that the reader can understand all of his points without looking at any downsides.

Read More
409 Words | 2 Pages

In the first paragraph Chavez mentions Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, stating that Dr. King’s “entire life was an example of power that nonviolence brings…” This reference to Dr. King causes those who know of his impact to realize that he lead a strong historical example of what nonviolence could achieve. By using Dr. King as an example it indicates that Chavez thinks that if nonviolence had heavily impacted the past, then it would most likely do the same in the present and future. Chavez also makes a reference to Gandhi and his nonviolent boycott in India, claiming that what he taught “is the most nearly perfect instrument of nonviolent change.” By using the word perfect to describe Gandhi’s teachings of nonviolence, it further supports Chavez’s stance for nonviolent resistance.

Read More

More about Rhetorical Analysis Of Non Violence By Chavez

Related Topics

Open Document